The Reclaiming of the Republic

The 64th anniversary of the Indian republic is worth celebrating for the usual reasons but this year there is an additional reason for cheer. It is true that India has been a republic for 63 years, but particularly in the last few years, it would appear that the meaning of being one has gradually been hollowed out. The Indian political system represents the people of the country on paper, but in practice it has become increasingly self-serving. Elections have been the defining feature of our democratic process, and indeed have been for the most part its primary and often, singular face.

Once elected, regimes have been able, by and large, to coast till the time comes for the next elections. There have been problems in maintaining power, but most of these have come from within one’s own party in the form of internal dissent and factionalism. The disagreements have not so much been about issues of policy or legislation, but about the personal ambition of those left out of the power sharing arrangement. The absence of inner party democracy has made the process of determining leadership a murky one, particularly in those parties where there isn’t a presumptive leader.

In the last couple of years, something has changed fundamentally. As the UPA2 in particular has discovered, now any government needs to tackle two very different imperatives of democracy. Apart from the task of getting elected, today it has to face up to the increasingly onerous task of conducting itself while in power. Getting elected and staying legitimate are now two distinct tasks, needing very different set of skills. For most political parties, the rise of a new media-enabled middle class is a phenomenon that is very difficult to take seriously. Years of hardwired political wisdom tells them that this class is electorally insignificant, and that it can be paid occasional lip service to, but otherwise comfortably ignored.

This attitude has been much in evidence in the manner in the which this government has conducted itself. In spite of facing one crisis after another, it has continued to blunder on, locked in a habit, paralysed by its own grasp of the past. The anti-corruption movement was dismissed as inconsequential till the government was left with no choice but to engage with it. The protests in the wake of the Delhi gang rape were handled with staggering incompetence, with no clear ownership of responsibility. We still have smug spokespersons speaking with lawyerly disdain, detached leaders who are held back to protect them from exposure, defensive bureaucrats focused narrowly on saving their own jobs and leaders without any understanding of how media works that try and navigate the government through various crises. We still have an opposition that believes in its own relevance in spite of having led no movement with popular backing in spite of the government getting so many things wrong.

The closed political system with its focus on elections and on intra and inter- party collisions as its centrepiece is becoming outdated. The combination of traditional media particularly television becoming shriller and more persistent, the coming of age of social media which atomises the right to be heard and do so in real time and the emergence of a middle class anxious to build its own political constituency has created a new political force that wields influence that is disproportionate to its numerical presence. However inconsequential the media might be in determining the final outcome of elections, it can make the life of any government a living hell on a day-to-day basis. This is something this government has encountered often, but not quite acknowledged.

In spite of its numerical inconsequence, the political system cannot govern if it does not cater to this new community of interests. For that it will need to reorganise itself, beginning with a new mental model of what administering power must look like. Coming to power is no longer a position of rest, but a call for action. To do justice to this, the question of who wields executive power and to what end must it be applied, become more important than in the past. If earlier, it was possible to think of the appointment and allocation of ministries largely through the lens of political accommodation, today personal competence will begin to matter much more. The ability to engage with stakeholders and communicate effectively will put pressure on the system to throw up more worthy candidates. Visible responsiveness and the ability to connect emotionally will become important not just while campaigning but while governing.

In some ways, the idea of a republic is being reclaimed with the political system being made more accountable for its actions. While it is the government that has seemingly been the focus of all attacks, in reality it is the entire political establishment that is facing a significant challenge. Of course, this new formation, comes with its own biases and vested interests and its own assertive tone of self-importance. It privileges only a certain set of issues and often seeks solutions that are often token in character. In its bias for the theatricality of democracy, it creates a new order of complexity that needs careful and often sophisticated navigating. There is a demand for a new kind of republic, which is both heartfelt and shallow. This gives the political system an opportunity to reassert its legitimacy and give direction to this new instinct. Instead of being defined exclusively by this new constituency, there is an opportunity to harness its power and redirect it towards more inclusive and long-term goals. However given that the political system is largely in denial, it is unlikely that we will see it take the lead. What is more likely is more shrill noise, and more reluctant acquiescence. The republic is being reclaimed, but the journey is going to be an imperfect and messy one.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

Author

Santosh Desai is a leading ad professional. He says he has strayed into writing entirely by accident, and for this he is "grateful". "City City Bang Bang" looks at contemporary Indian society from an everyday vantage point. It covers issues big and small, tends where possible to avoid judgmental positions, and tries instead to understand what makes things the way they are. The desire to look at things with innocent doubt helps in the emergence of fresh perspectives and hopefully, of clarity of a new kind.

Santosh Desai is a leading ad professional. He says he has strayed into writing entirely by accident, and for this he is "grateful". "City City Bang Bang" l. . .

From around the web

More from The Times of India

Comments

Top Comment

()

Author

Santosh Desai is a leading ad professional. He says he has strayed into writing entirely by accident, and for this he is "grateful". "City City Bang Bang" looks at contemporary Indian society from an everyday vantage point. It covers issues big and small, tends where possible to avoid judgmental positions, and tries instead to understand what makes things the way they are. The desire to look at things with innocent doubt helps in the emergence of fresh perspectives and hopefully, of clarity of a new kind.

Santosh Desai is a leading ad professional. He says he has strayed into writing entirely by accident, and for this he is "grateful". "City City Bang Bang" l. . .